On the surface, the idea of adding more “green” energy in Michigan may sound harmless.

But that could not be further from the truth when it comes to our state’s economic future. In fact, the main problem is the “green” it would take to add that renewable energy.

We support generating more of Michigan’s electricity from renewable sources such as wind, solar and biomass. However, we oppose ballot Proposal 3 because it’s too expensive.

Speaking from years of business and labor experience, both domestic and international, we can say with confidence that Michigan voters would be wise to respect the constitution and
vote no on the renewable energy mandate known as Proposal 3.

Amending the state constitution to require 25 percent of the state’s electric supply to come from renewable sources by 2025 may sound like a good idea. However, meeting that mandate would cost electric customers an estimated $12 billion – that’s billion with a ‘B’ — driving up bills for years to come.

If passed, Michigan would be the only state in the entire country to inject an energy mandate into its constitution, and Michigan shouldn’t be the first.

This is a budget buster for working people, families and retirees and seniors on fixed incomes.

Michigan’s economy is only now starting to recover from the worst recession America has experienced in decades. This is no time to hit families and job providers with unnecessary costs, especially for energy from sources that too often are unpredictable and unreliable.

The staggering cost burden isn’t the only reason that Proposal 3 is a bad idea. Voters also should consider:

• Michigan already has a reasonable, affordable 10 percent renewable energy goal by 2015. Our state should reach the 10 percent goal before establishing a new goal.

• The constitution is the wrong place for this mandate. Locking energy mandates into the constitution would eliminate the flexibility to meet unforeseen challenges and changes in the state’s energy market. What if the experiment fails? We can’t reverse the constitution.

• Today, local communities set their zoning standards and ordinances to govern the development of wind farms and other renewable energy projects. If Proposal 3 is locked into the state constitution, such zoning laws would certainly be challenged on constitutional grounds and potentially overturned, stripping local officials of all their authority.

Paying billions of dollars to bake a 25 percent renewable energy requirement into the constitution is a dangerous strategy for Michigan’s economy.